And when his undreaded rage is done
The "London Season" they say is begun.
With wine, feast, revelling, laugh and song,
The hours rose-garlanded dance along.
The whirl of wickedness wilder grows,

In this western camp of our bitter foes.
They fight with each other-the victors take
The largest share of the wealth we make.

They spend on their houses, their women, their wives,
The money wrung from our blasted lives.

It is theirs to enjoy-it is ours to pay.

Do they never dream of a reckoning day

When the lives they have wrecked shall be counted up,
And measured the blood that has brightened their cup,
When we who have worked shall take payment due
And they, for their work, shall have payment too?
Do they dream of that coming time? Not they!
Their feet flit fast down the steep swift way.
They see not the waiting snakes that hide.
In the hot-house flowers at their life-path's side.
They know no justice, no pity, no fear—
But the Spring is here!

Yes here! In the hope we had almost lost
That has sprung to bud after long years' frost-
In this fire in our veins that cries "Give youth,
Love, manhood, life, for the Right and the Truth.”
In our steady purpose-for Freedom's sake—
Through custom, privilege, "Fate,” to break—
In the brains of the thinkers, the arms of the men
Who will strike and strike and still strike again
Till they cut our way to the land of flowers,
And the summer of freedom at last is ours.
In these is the Spring. The winter was sore-
It is over and done-and will come no more.
The fruit will grow with the changing year
Though only the blossoms now appear
For the sake of the fruit the blossoms are dear,
And the Spring is here-the Spring is here.

E. NESBIT.

E

A Nursery of Millionaires

"Non

TON College is an institution which is usually regarded by advanced thinkers with a feeling akin to despair. ragioniam di lor, ma guarda e passa," is the thought that is uppermost in their minds, as they see the provoking stability and prosperity enjoyed by this remarkable relic of medieval times, to which, in spite of the acknowledged deficiencies in the Eton system of education, our modern aristocrats and plutocrats vie in sending their sons. Yet the study of Eton ought surely to be interesting and instructive to all advocates of social reform, if only for the reason that it furnishes them with an admirable example of the evil results of inordinate wealth. Just as a philosophical writer, engaged in studying the question of Liberty from every point of view, might not unprofitably undertake a journey to St. Petersburg, in order to observe the working of the precisely opposite system to that which he advocates, so the social reformer may derive an unfailing text for his sermons by the contemplation of the chief of English public schools. Eton, the nursery of our future landlords and capitalists, offers a multum-in-parvo of information on the subject of social inequality and freedom of contract; for it shows us not only the benefits that result from a richly endowed institution, and a school composed of the sons of the wealthiest men in the country, but also a model system of free trade in boys, and internecine competition among the masters engaged in tuition.

It is sometimes urged, in defence of the Eton system, that the social advantages of the school outbalance educational defects. Boys are sent to Eton, it is said, to learn how to live rather than to acquire book-learning. I fear that this consolatory suggestion, which is often fondly entertained by patriotic Etonians, has little foundation in fact, for though Eton boys have of course the opportunity common to all other schoolboys, and not peculiar to Etonians, of making school friendships which are often valuable in after-life, they have certainly no special reason to congratulate themselves, as far as Eton itself is concerned, on the social condition of its inmates. It will perhaps be found convenient to consider the social status of Eton under three heads-viz. (1) the endowed College; (2) the position of the boys; (3) the position of the masters. (1) In the first place, we find at Eton one of the most richly

endowed colleges in England, thanks to the munificent provision of the Royal Founder, Henry VI., whose praiseworthy intention was to establish "a seat of learning for poor scholars," though Eton has unfortunately become precisely the opposite of this. One peculiarity of Eton is what may be called its dual control, for the College government is still distinct from the School, though both are now under the supervision of the governing body. There are accordingly two funds; of which the College fund is supplied by the revenues derived from land, tithes, and house-rent, while the School fund is dependent on the payments made by the parents of the boys. Eton thus possesses an immense pecuniary advantage over ordinary schools, which are compelled to pay all expenses out of the regular school charges; whereas at Eton, the building expenses and such-like outlays, are defrayed by the College, and the School fund is only called upon to pay masters' salaries and direct educational charges. In other words, the nation, or a portion of the nation, contributes annually a large sum towards the maintenance of a wealthy institution which is already amply supplied by the heavy charges levied on the parents of the boys. What good is done with all these College revenues? What can this" endowed College," or in plain words, charity school, show for all the money it annually draws? The question may readily be asked; but it is not so easy to answer it? The maintenance and education of the seventy King's Scholars, which is the chief function performed by the College of Eton, can hardly be held to be a very valuable service to the country in general, for the pious intention of the founder is now quite disregarded, and the King's Scholars are for the most part sons of well-to-do parents, who could easily afford to pay for their childrens' education from their private resources. But the most flagrant waste in the application of these funds, is the payment of a Provost and Fellows for doing nothing at all. The Provost receives £2,000 a year, without the obligation of any duties worthy of the name, while the Fellows each get some £800 a year, together with a residence in College, and a valuable country living into the bargain. The absurdity of this arrangement has been so far recognised, that no more Fellows are now to be appointed; but the Provostship has been allowed to remain intact, though it is obvious that the nominal duties of the Provost could be far better discharged by the Head-Master. On the whole, it is impossible to examine this endowed institution with one's eyes open, without coming to the conclusion that a vast deal of the nation's money is annually squandered in supporting a very costly and very useless establishment.

(2) Secondly let us consider a still more important subject, the social influences surrounding the boys educated at Eton. Nowhere are the baneful effects of inordinate weath more conspicuously seen than in this nursery of youthful millionaires. The boys themselves, under favourable conditions, would offer good material to the teacher, being in a large majority of cases naturally good-tempered and well-meaning enough, but they are ruined by the very profusion of the gifts which fortune has lavished on them. How can boys become otherwise than extravagant, selfish, and unintellectual, when they are

unfortunate enough to possess the means of indulging every luxurious whim that enters their minds? It is no exaggeration to say that an Eton boy often spends in the course of a school-time as much money as would support a poor family for the same period; and this too in mere additional luxuries, quite irrespective of the regular school expenses. Unnecessary bills at the tailor's and haberdasher's; unnecessary purchases for the adornment of his person or his room; unnecessary feeding at the pastry-cook's or confectioner's; all these soon form lasting habits of selfish indulgence, for which no amount of graceful self-possession and ease of demeanour can possibly compensate. It is impossible to blame individual parents for their son's extravagance; indeed, many of them are fully aware of the temptations the boys incur by this superabundance of wealth, but at Rome one must do as Rome does, and the force of custom is too strong to admit of individual improvement. It is only one more proof, if proof were needed, that the unequal distribution of wealth is fatal to the true welfare of the rich, as well as a crushing injustice to the poor.

The extravagance of Eton boys is recognised and deplored by many Etonians, and it was as a counterpoise to this growing evil that the "Eton Mission in Hackney Wick was established some years ago. The object of those who promoted this charitable institution was doubtless beyond all praise, but it must nevertheless be pointed out that such charity, though it may benefit a few individuals, can do no lasting good either to the upper classes or the lower, to those who give, or those who take. It cannot permanently benefit the poor; for it does not attempt to ascertain and remove the root of the evil. It cannot really benefit the rich; for to give a trifle out of much superfluous wealth is no very valuable moral training, especially for boys who regard all such subscriptions as a necessary tax, to be extracted, if possible, from the parental purse. How different might it be, if Eton boys were invited to consider the true source of their parents' wealth; if the proposition were set nakedly before them. What is the meaning of "having-say-ten thousand a year?" If they were once led to ponder the question why they and their parents are clothed, fed, and supported, without being compelled to work for their own living, it might be an invaluable moral lesson, and one that would make them less disposed to indulge thenceforth in any needless luxuries and extravagance. But this is a subject which must be carefully concealed from Eton boys; and accordingly they grow up with an undisturbed conscience, and a serene conviction that it is a fine thing to live sumptuously on the labour of others.

(3) This brings me to the third division our subject. It being obvious enough, if not to Eton boys, at any rate to the readers of To-Day, that the lavish wealth which supports this aristocratic school is the fruit of the toil of thousands of poor men in fields and factories, whose children are starved in body and mind in order that their employers' sons may be educated regardless of cost; we may at least expect a striking result from this favoured institution. As the parents of Eton boys are able, through the power they possess over the labour of their poorer fellow-countrymen, to pay enormous sums for their children's education, and as the College

of Eton is largely endowed with revenues drawn from the same source, we may reasonably look to this quarter for a masterpiece of educational success. Öther and cheaper schools, which have to contend with the difficulty of insufficient funds, manage to give their boys a more or less satisfactory training; but at Eton we shall surely find the ne plus ultra of sound scholarship and intellectual acquirements. Strange to say, the result is the very contrary of our anticipations. Nowhere is there a more shallow, flimsy, and unsatisfactory education than that given in Henry VI's Royal Institution; the poorest grammar-school would be ashamed to turn out boys so ill-educated as nine-tenths of our Etonians, And the main cause of this is not far to seek; it is the competition among the masters themselves that ruins the efficiency of the teaching at Eton, and prevents any real progress. Most unhappily for the school, the system of payment is based on an indirect and competitive method of remuneration, which allows some individuals to become extremely rich, while others, for no apparent reason, are left in comparative poverty. This internecine competition, this system of "devil take the hindmost" in the matter of getting pupils, is the more deplorable at Eton, because the very large payments made by the parents of the boys would, if fairly apportioned, enable all the masters, indeed a much larger staff than that at present appointed, to draw proper salaries. Exclusive of all charges for board and maintenance (which are very high), each boy pays an entrance fee of ten guineas, and an annual sum of £24 into the school fund. Taking the average number of boys as 900, and the average entry of new boys as 300 in the year, we find the school fund in possession of between £24,000 and £25,000 for annual payment of Masters and educational expenses. But, besides this, each boy has to pay £21 per annum to a private classical tutor, and thus a sum of nearly £19,000 is spent wholly on indirect tuition, and is scrambled for by a competitive process from which all non-classical masters are rigidly excluded. What wonder if the School fund is impoverished by this immense absorption of money into private channels? The result of this special endowment of the classical masters is of course the creation of a "vested interest " as a privileged class, which insists on the retainment of the old classical curriculum, in all its utter absurdity and waste of time, for fear that the introduction of modern studies should necessitate a reform of the financial system, and thus lead to the abolition of the tutorial fee. Moreover, as the school fund is thus impoverished by the interception of nearly half the money paid by the parents of the boys, it is impossible to engage as many masters as the large size of the school really demands, and, accordingly, the "divisions" often contain as many as forty boys, and never less than thirty, thus seriously impairing the efficiency of the teaching. In fact, nearly all the defects in the Eton system of education, and their name is legion, are directly due to the anomalous method of payment, and the ceaseless competition among the classical masters to secure the largest number of private pupils. Reforms which have long been urgently needed are constantly postponed, in order that the existing state of affairs may not be interfered with; and the utility